Posts I Like

politics

Jean-Marie Le Pen, founder of France’s far-right Front National, has suggested the deadly virus Ebola could solve the global “population explosion” and by extension Europe’s “immigration problem”. At a cocktail party before an election rally in Marseille on Tuesday evening, days before the European elections in which the FN is leading the polls in France, Le Pen spoke of the “demographic explosion” in the world.

“Monseigneur Ebola could sort that out in three months,” he said in front of journalists.

Later, addressing supporters, Le Pen, 85, said he feared the French population risked being “replaced … by immigrants”. “In our country and in all Europe, we have known a cataclysmic phenomenon – a migratory invasion that, my friends, we are seeing only the beginning of today.”

Le Pen, who is standing as MEP for the south-east seat, added: “This massive immigration risks producing a real replacement of populations if we don’t arrive in power soon enough to put an end to the politics of decadence that has been followed for decades.”

He said that religion added an “aggravating factor” to this problem because many immigrants were Muslim and Islam had a “conquering vocation … and even more conquering when it feels strong and they feel numerous”

Minirant

I have always found it odd that there are such crazy people in politics. It is also interesting that he never mentioned the politics of how certain demographics get medical access and don’t. What is also interesting is that it’s a former colonial power talking about an immigration problem. I reported a few months ago about how 14 African countries are obliged by France, trough a colonial pact, to put 85% of their foreign reserve into France central bank under French minister of Finance control. Until now, 2014, Togo and about 13 other African countries still have to pay colonial debt to France. African leaders who refuse are killed or victim of coup.

Those who obey are supported and rewarded by France with lavish lifestyle while their people endure extreme poverty, and desperation.

It’s such an evil system even denounced by the European Union, but France is not ready to move from that colonial system which puts about 500 billions dollars from Africa to its treasury year in year out.

We often accuse African leaders of corruption and serving western nations interests instead, but there is a clear explanation for that behavior. They behave so because they are afraid the be killed or victim of a coup. They want a powerful nation to back them in case of aggression or trouble. But, contrary to a friendly nation protection, the western protection is often offered in exchange of these leaders renouncing to serve their own people or nations’ interests. African leaders would work in the interest of their people if they were not constantly stalked and bullied by colonial countries.

In fact, during the last 50 years, a total of 67 coups happened in 26 countries in Africa, 16 of those countries are french ex-colonies, which means 61% of the coups happened in Francophone Africa.

Former French President Jacques Chirac recently spoke about the African nations money in France banks. Here is a video of him speaking about the french exploitation scheme. He is speaking in French, but here is a short excerpt transcript: “We have to be honest, and acknowledge that a big part of the money in our banks come precisely from the exploitation of the African continent.”

I thought of this question today first as basic semantics questions. An oligarchy is defined basically as: a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution. On the other hand a democracy is defined as: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. Semantically there is a problem here and a question no one wants to answer: What is the value of the average persons vote in an oligarchy masquerading as a democracy?

And the results are interesting. In the work that’s essentially the gold standard in the field, it’s concluded that for roughly 70% of the population – the lower 70% on the wealth/income scale – they have no influence on policy whatsoever. They’re effectively disenfranchised. As you move up the wealth/income ladder, you get a little bit more influence on policy. When you get to the top, which is maybe a tenth of one percent, people essentially get what they want, i.e. they determine the policy. So the proper term for that is not democracy; it’s plutocracy.

- Chomsky – The US behaves nothing like a Democracy, but you’ll never hear about it in our Free Press.

So then the questions is between now and Tuesday, November 4, 2014, when mid-term elections will take place, what change can we expect to put into place through our votes? Seventy percent of our population wont suddenly be tagged back into the game. Corporate money won’t suddenly loose influence over politics.

The political machine has awoken, we are hearing more and more about Midterm Elections. We are slowly behind reminded how much our votes count, and how we are the agents of change; catalyst if you will to help precipitate into reality the vision of this country we so desperately want. Yet how to reconcile this with the reality of the times. The disenfranchisement of 70% of our population, corporate influences, demonization of the poor, etc?

For me it is ridiculous to blindly follow ideology. While each ideology gives us some insight. That insight should be an aid in helping in our attempts to balance exercising common sense and remaining open-minded. In other words we cannot let someone else’s thoughts and opinion dictate our behaviors. Looking at these words from a former waitress at Hooters:

As for making profits off of my body, it’s easy enough to reconcile when you consider that nearly any restaurant (or service job) will likely judge you a little on your appearance. When exactly did it become a problem to make money off of your body anyway? It just so happened that at Hooters we wore less than at other places. Any position where you have to put yourself in front of other people, in any degree of dress, your audience is listening, making judgments and perhaps fantasies about you. I’ve gotten hit on at the grocery store and walking down the street by total strangers, it’s a lot more comfortable when it’s in a controlled situation.

Honestly, the ability to do this in a safe environment and enjoy myself couldn’t have been more liberating. I didn’t do porn or strip or give handies under the table for cash, I simply appeared each day at the tacky, wood-paneled franchise and did my job.

Each of us has to come to a conclusion on our own as to what is acceptable, without forcing our view on others. For this women her experience at Hooters was liberating. I did a lot of reading before I went to the Tilted Kilt and afterwards. One clear conclusion I’ve reach is that while there are some clear cut cases of objectification, there are other cases where our societal, linguistic, religious, ethnic, socio-political difference make it very difficult to call.

In other words, the reality depicted in classrooms and books is at best a limited approximation of reality. It all tends to fall apart once strong emotions, deep-seated projects, and fantasy come into play.

Final Thoughts

When the waitress came by to take my order I didn’t see a pair of tits just hovering in the air. I also didn’t hear a feminine voice coming out of the ether telling me the specials of the day. I saw a person like me who looked tired. I have seen a pair of tits before. I’ve even seen a woman naked before it’s not a big deal. I’ve seen enough women naked that is someone bearing me gifts of food like the three wise men did the Messiah isnt going to phase me.

Places like Hooters or The Tilted Kilt are created with a masculine fantasy in mind. Some customers pay for time in a controlled environment where it is ok to ogle, admire and lightly flirt while imbibing the foods and entertainment statistically geared to specific male demographics. There are a plethora of reason why each customer goes. For the families there I am pretty sure it wasn’t to view this server as an object. Each case is specific. For the guys glued to the TV watching the soccer game or the UFC fight, or cheering for a goal, or knockout I am sure that while they appreciate the chicks there, the fact that pay per views are so expensive had a role in them going there. It’s not this blanket objectification just by entering the doors.

Another important issue is the will to chose. If women are put in a position economically where they have no choice but to sell their looks, body, companionship to make a living than that is clearly a case of an entrenched social/economic objectification. I don’t think that the women working at these establishments are forced into these jobs because of economic duress.

The idea that someone else is used as a tool for another’s purposes need further explication, without care for there feelings concerns or experiences. Every relationship is based upon benefit and gain. If there is no coercion of any form there for the women to be there then it seems to be a mutual beneficial arrangement. The presences of attractive females brings people in, as do the giant big screen TV’s and sports, beer and food. The women there are not lacking in agency or self-determination. They are not under the control or ownership of another. There are rules, standards and security in place to safeguard them. There is a concern for their health or well being.

That’s my story and I’m Sticking to it, for now

With that said, it doesn’t seem that this environment exploits women. It’s actually quite tame. I have seen regular bars with scantily dressed shot girls and all kinds of lasciviousness. But that is just what I feel at the moment. In due time the more I read, the I talk to people I’m sure things will change but at the moment that’s my story.

Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett has cut $1.5 billion from schools since 2008, mostly in poor districts. Over the same period, wealthy race-horse owners have received $1.5 billion in tax subsidies.

The Facts

Corbett’s first budget, for 2011–2012, proposed a $1.2 billion reduction in public-education funding and succeeded in getting $860 million excised, with the majority of cuts hitting low-income school districts. Cuts to basic education funding equaled $410 per child in the 2011–2012 budget and the $128 million in basic education funding the legislature wrested back mostly went to wealthier school districts. As the Education Law Center reports “Since 2008, school districts have lost nearly $1.5 billion in total funding previously received from the state or from federal stimulus… The cuts have been up to ten times larger in poor districts on a per student basis.”

In just six years, more than $1.5 billion has gone to horse owners, race-horse breeders and others in the industry, thanks to a little-known state subsidy that feeds 12 percent of casino slot revenues to the horse-race industry. Last year, slots pulled in $2.4 billion in revenue. While schools struggle, pension funds decline and the state’s roads and bridges crumble, many of the recipients of the horse-race subsidy are out-of-state multimillionaires.

Thinking Politically

I am a bit of a leftist, especially in regards to education. I think the government should be investing in the public school system. In my opinion having the best universities in the land private, breeds elitism, workplace nepotism and strengthens the entrenched oligarchy. As an educator I can tell you that there are so many people who are ready and willing to share they enthusiasm and passion for learning with the next generation of students, however with such low wages many are turned away from doing so. If governments would be willing to invest in public education, or perhaps do something with student loan debt, the dividends we would reap as a society would be enormous. Imagine if that 1.5 billion dollars was invested into the Pennsylvania education system. Investing in education is investing in the future of a nation. Investing in race horses is investing in the nations vested oligarchy.

What we fail to realize quite often is that education cuts are a tool for class warfare.It’s no surprise that cuts are 1o – times larger in the poor areas. This is more than just not investing in the future this is keep people of a certain economic class down. The far reaching effects of this kind of governance in race relations, domestic violence, social mobility is amazing if you think about it.